Seòmar agus comataidhean

I agree that it is not about every single complaint being investigated. The petitioners would certainly point out serious complaints that have not been investigated. As an Edinburgh MSP, I am concerned about Edinburgh schools, but this is not just an Edinburgh issue—it is an issue across Scotland.

I hope that, at stage 3, there will be a workable way of giving the inspectorate a new opportunity to hear concerns and decide which ones it should take forward under the complaints procedure. That is why I have tried to keep the amendments open for the inspectorate to be able to do that. I am happy to hear the cabinet secretary’s view on the matter. The petitioners have a specific ask, and the amendments are just one step towards improving the whistleblowing and safeguarding culture in Scotland.

I move amendment 157.

Like other members, I am very sympathetic to what Pam Duncan-Glancy is trying to achieve. However, I am not quite sure where she has got the six-month period from. I do not know what the cabinet secretary will say in her closing remarks, but perhaps something could be considered on the time period for serving on the board or having a refresh. Given the need to move the new organisation forward, I am slightly concerned about the six-month period creating uncertainty.

The bill has no targets or minimum levels of rights, either for apprentices or for employers. Is that something that your members have highlighted and fed back to you on?

That goes back to Willie Rennie’s point about the local authority’s responsibility around inspection. Through the wording of the amendment—I wait to hear what the cabinet secretary has to say on it—we could look towards that documentation being included. To go back to my earlier point, it is about transparency, so that we can see whether any concerns have been raised. I do not think that it should take a freedom of information request to find out that there have been 150 concerning incidents—as was the case back in 2018—and to get full transparency.

The responses to our call for views highlighted concerns around a lack of representation of employers in industry. Have you read those responses? What is your take on how you would ensure that that works?

I raised the matter with the minister during education portfolio questions on 24 April, and the letter that he sent to me on 30 April said that the analysis would be received in June, which would then allow you to update your information. Is that still—

I think that the cabinet secretary has met with Beth Morrison about her Calum’s law campaign. I do not know whether Daniel Johnson’s bill will time out in the current parliamentary session, but it seeks to improve data collection, the recording of incidents and the training of individuals. It does not look as though that is captured in amendment 88, so perhaps the cabinet secretary would look to lodge an amendment at stage 3 to include that.

I fully respect the point that the petition that I have mentioned is still live, but will the potential discussions that the cabinet secretary has referred to include the establishment of what the petitioners have been seeking—that is, an independent national whistleblowing officer not just for education but for wider children’s services in Scotland? That is currently missing, and I point out that we have moved to provide such a function for health services, for example. Is that something that the Government would consider?

I am not sure that I can get the cabinet secretary to make another intervention on Pam Duncan-Glancy, but I think that it is important that there is an opportunity for a refresh. I wonder whether the member, along with the cabinet secretary, could go away and think about a suitable amendment for stage 3. We all want confidence to be rebuilt in the new organisation, and I am sympathetic to what the member is trying to achieve. I do not know whether the Scottish Government needs to be a bit more flexible on what the transitional arrangements look like. Where people are not performing, we need to build in opportunities for a review to take place.

I take on board those points. The amendments would expand the new inspectorate regime to include what people want, which should be welcome. We know that there are on-going issues with the school estate, with RAAC being one of those issues. It is welcome that the vast majority of schools have now, I think, corrected that, but parents will want to be confident that there is an on-going inspection regime and that the certificates, which are sometimes provided by private companies, will not be lost, because they will be asked for when an inspection takes place.

I take the member’s point, and given my colleague Stephen Kerr’s point about when inspections take place, there might be a different or better framework for making that documentation available from local authorities. I understand that, and I am sure that Liz Smith will be open to discussing and developing that further.

As with Liz Smith’s amendments, amendments 165 and 209 in my name are probing amendments to consider the opportunity to explore how we can improve child protection and safeguarding in educational establishments. Given what the cabinet secretary has said, I do not intend to move them.